IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


/y 


^.4^ 


1.0    ,f  "^  I 


I.I 


2.5 


12.2 


■^  1^  i: 


1.8 


1.25 

1.4      1.6 

-» 6"     

. 

V 


v^ 


HlOtDgTdDtliC 

Sciences 
Corpomtion 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  145S0 

(716)  873-4503 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHIVI/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  csecked  below. 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
una  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m^thode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 


□    Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 

□    Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommagee 

□    Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurde  et/ou  pellicul6e 


D 


Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


I      I    Coloured  pages/ 


D 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damag.  i/ 
Pages  endommag6es 


I      I    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 


Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  pelliculdes 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  d6color6es,  tachetdes  ou  piqu^es 


□    Coloured  maps/ 
Cartes  gdographiques  en  couleur 

□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

□    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


D 


D 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli6  avec  d'autres  documents 


r~7\    Tight  binding  may  cause  shadowi>  or  distortion 


along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serr^e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 

distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intdrieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutdes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  dtait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6x6  film^es. 


□    Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d^tachdes 

I     7   Showthrough/ 
LJlJ    Transparence 

I      I    Quality  of  print  varies/ 


□ 


Quality  indgale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partieilement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  film^es  d  nouveau  de  facon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


D 


Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppldmentaires; 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film6  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqui  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


12X 


16X 


20X 


26X 


30X 


24X 


28X 


n 


32X 


Th«  copy  film«d  h«r«  has  b««n  raproducad  thanks 
to  tha  o^narosity  of: 

Library  Division 

Provincial  Archives  of  British  Columbia 


L'axamplaira  film*  f ut  raproduit  grica  A  la 
gAnirosltA  da: 

Library  Division 

Provincial  Archives  of  British  Columbia 


Tha  imagaa  appaaring  hara  ara  tha  bast  quality 
potsibia  considaring  tha  condition  and  lagibility 
of  tha  original  copy  and  in  kaaping  with  tha 
filming  contract  spacif ications. 


Las  imagas  suivantas  ont  MA  raproduitas  avac  la 
plus  grand  soin,  compta  tanu  da  la  condition  at 
da  la  nattat*  da  Taxampiaira  filmA.  at  an 
conformity  avac  las  conditions  du  contrat  da 
filmaga. 


Original  copias  in  printad  pnpar  covars  ara  filmad 
baginning  with  tha  front  covar  and  anding  on 
tha  last  paga  with  a  printad  or  illustratad  impras- 
sion.  or  tha  back  covar  whan  appropriata.  All 
othar  original  copias  ara  filmad  baginning  on  tha 
first  paga  with  a  printad  or  illustratad  impras- 
sion,  and  anding  on  tha  last  paga  with  a  printad 
or  illustratad  imprassion. 


Las  axamplairas  originaux  dont  la  couvartura  an 
papiar  ast  imprimAa  sont  filmte  an  commandant 
par  la  pramiar  plat  at  9n  tarminant  soit  par  la 
darnlAra  paga  qui  comporta  ur.j  amprainta 
d'imprassion  ou  d'illustration.  soit  par  la  sacond 
plat,  salon  la  cas.  Tous  las  autras  axamplairas 
originaux  sont  filmte  mn  commandant  par  la 
pramiAre  paga  qui  comporta  una  amprainta 
d'imprassion  ou  d'illustration  at  9n  tarminant  par 
la  dsrniAre  paga  qui  comporta  una  talla 
amprainta. 


Tha  last  racordad  frama  on  aach  microficha 
shall  contain  tha  symbol  — »■  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  tha  symbol  V  (moaning  "END  "). 
whichavar  appiias. 


Un  das  symbolas  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
darniira  imaga  da  chaqua  microfiche,  salon  la 
cas:  la  symboia  — »•  signifia  "A  SUIVRE  ",  la 
symbols  Y  signifia  "FIN". 


IMaps,  platas,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
baginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  mary  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  Atra 
fiimte  A  das  taux  da  reduction  diffirents. 
Lorsque  ie  document  est  trop  grand  pour  Atre 
reproduit  en  un  seui  clichA,  il  est  film*  A  partir 
da  I'angle  supArieur  gauche,  de  gauche  A  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas.  en  prenant  la  nombre 
d'images  nAcessaira.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
iliustrent  la  mAthode. 


1 

2 

3 

32X 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

PlxOVU^!aAL  UBRAriY, 
,     F'^CT^'^r ''^•.  ff'  C. 

The  Alaffca  Boundary  Line. 


617 


■iv- 


BESIDE  THE  STILL  WATERS. 

I. 

Ah  God!     To  lie  awake  at  deep  of  night, 

And  hear  the  rain  down-dripping  overhead, 

And  know  that  joy  is  quenched  and  hope  is  fled, 

And  from  all  earth  have  faded  glow  and  light! 

Have  mercy,  Father!     On  my  smarting  sight 

Let  dreamless  sleep  its  grateful  shadows  spread; 

Give  me  a  while  to  rest  as  one  who,  dead, 

Can  reck  of  nothing!     When  the  east  grows  white 

I  will  he  strong,  will  bravely  face  once  more 

This  dry-eyed  agony,  not  as  of  yore 

Soothed  by  swift-gushing  tears  !     Now,  all  my  soul, 

All  prayers,  all  yearning,  but  reach  out  and  set, 

Athirst,  ablaze,  towards  one  receding  goal  — 

One  hour's  oblivion  —  to  forget,  forget! 

II. 

My  God,  I  thank  Thee !     Ah,  I  cannot  know 
By  what  still  waters  and  what  pastures  green, 
Close  maybe  to  those  secret  founts  unseen, 
All  human  finding  fathoms  deep  below, 
Whence  life  itself  takes  its  mysterious  flow. 
Thou  hast  my  spirit  led  in  sleep,  to  glean 
Healing  and  strength !     Grief  lingers,  yet  its  keen. 
Fine  throb  grows  dimmer,  fainter,  in  the  slow 
Advancing  dawn.     A  lark  will  soar  and  sing 
While  still  a  tiny  clod  of  earth  may  cling 
To  her  glad  breast:  and   so,  dear  Lord,  I  too 
Rise  from  the  ground,  and,  lifting  up  my  voice. 
As  golden  morning  flushes  into  view. 
Remember  still,  and  yet  rejoice  —  rejoice  ! 


■  c>  U 


Stiiart  Sterne. 


THE  ALASKA  BOUNDARY   LINE. 


"  In  endeavoring  to  estimate  its  char- 
acter I  am  glad  to  begin  with  what  is 
clear  and  beyond  question.  I  refer  to 
the  boundaries  fixed  by  the  treaty." 


which  Russia  ceded  to  the  United  States 
her  entire  possessions  in  America.  The 
distinguished  orator,  whose  address  on 
that  occasion  was  an  exhibition  of  pro- 


These  words  form  the  opening  of  the  found  historical  and  geographical  research 

magnificent  speech  of  Charles  Sumner  in  and  far-sighted  statesmanship  which  has 

the  United  States  Senate  in  1867,  in  ad-  seldom  been  equaled,  does  not  appear  to 

voca«y  of  the  ratification  of  the  treaty  by  have  suspected  that  by  coming  into  pes- 


"^i-. 


m 


518 


The  Alaska  Boundary  Line. 


Api-il, 


session  of  the  great  territory  whose  pur- 
chase he  so  ably  advocated  the  United 
States  would  find  itself  involved,  a  quar- 
ter of  a  century  later,  in  two  controver- 
sies, both  with  Great  Britain,  one  of 
which  should  concern  what  he  then  de- 
clared to  be  "  clear  and  beyond  question." 
What  is  generally  known  as  the  "  Be- 
ring Sea  controversy,"  but  which  might 
be  called  with  greater  prc^mety  the  "  fur 
seal  controversy,"  has  had  its  beginning, 
unfortunately  iiot  its  end.  within  the  last 
decade.  In  Sumner's  day  nothing  was 
known  which  indicated  the  possible  exist- 
ence of  conditions  such  as  have  given  rise 
to  this  dispute.  It  is  a  little  difficult  to 
understand,  however,  that  so  able  a  dip- 
lomat as  Sumner  could  have  studied  the 
definition  of  the  boundaries  of  the  new 
territory  as  found  in  the  treaty  of  ces- 
sion without  seeing  therein  the  seed  of 
future  complications  with  the  English  na- 
tion. That  he  began  by  assuming  the 
boundaries  to  be  "  beyond  question  "  must 
have  been  due  in  large  measure  to  the  fact 
that,  as  far  as  related  to  the  land  lines, 
they  were  turned  over  to  us  exactly  as 
they  had  been  agreed  upon  by  treaty  of 
Russia  with  Great  Britain  more  than  for- 
ty years  earlier,  during  which  period  no 
controversy  over  them  had  arisen.  He 
was  aware,  of  course,  of  the  controver- 
sies between  Russia  and  both  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain,  in  the  first 
quarter  of  the  century,  regarding  territo- 
rial and  maritime  rights  and  privileges, 
but  the  vagueness,  in  certain  impoi'tant 
respects,  of  the  English-Russian  treaty  of 
1825  does  not  seem  to  have  impressed 
itself  upon  him.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
superior  im{)ortance  of  southeast  Alaska, 
which  is  the  only  part  whose  boundary  is 
likely  to  be  in  controversy,  was  not  gen- 
erally recognized  at  that  time,  and  reli- 
able information  about  the  whole  was  so 
scanty  that  little  attention  was  likely  to 
be  given  to  mere  "metes  and  bounds." 
Since  the  occupancy  of  this  part  of  the 
territory  by  Americans  and  its  fairly  full 
exploration  by  government  officers,  its 


importance  has  been  admitted  by  us  and 
recognized  by  the  English  to  the  end  that 
the  boundary  line  dividing  it  from  Brit- 
ish Columbia  and  the  Northwest  Terri- 
tory bids  fair  to  become  a  matter  of  dis- 
pute between  the  two  nations,  and  one 
of  no  mean  proportions.  Though  not  of 
such  a  nature  as  to  demand  immediate 
settlement,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  it  may 
be  involved  with  two  or  three  other  ques- 
tions at  present  pending,  and  about  which 
not  only  diplomats,  but  the  people  gener- 
ally have  been,  and  are,  leeply  concerned. 
The  Alaska  boundary  line  is  quite  worthy 
of  separate  consideration  on  its  own  ac- 
count, and  it  will  be  a  misfortune  if  any 
ill-considered  act  shall  result  in  its  being 
merged  with  other  questions  of  really  less 
importance,  and  subjected  to  the  by  no 
means  uncertain  chances  of  arbitration. 

In  the  treaty  which  determined  the  ces- 
sion of  the  Russian  possessions  in  North 
America  to  the  United  States,  concluded 
March  30,  1867,  the  geographical  limits 
(on  the  east)  of  the  territory  transferred 
are  defined  as  follows  :  — 

"  The  eastern  limit  is  the  line  of  de- 
marcation between  the  Russian  and  the 
British  possessions  in  North  America  as 
established  bv  the  convention  between 

4/ 

Russia  and  Great  Britain  of  February 
28,  1825,  and  described  in  Articles  III. 
and  IV.  of  said  convention  in  the  follow- 
ing terms :  — 

"  Commencing  from  the  southernmost 
point  of  the  island  called  Prince  of  Wales 
Island,  which  point  lies  in  the  parallel 
of  54°  40'  north  latitude,  and  between  the 
131st  and  133d  degree  of  west  longi- 
tude (meridian  of  Greenwich),  the  sc.id 
line  shall  ascend  to  the  north  along  the 
channel  called  Portland  Channel  as  far 
as  the  point  of  the  continent  where  it 
strikes  the  56th  degree  of  north  latitude ; 
from  this  last-mentioned  point  the  line 
of  demarcation  shall  follow  the  summit 
of  the  mountains  situated  parallel  to  the 
coast  as  far  as  the  point  of  inte-section 
of  the  141st  degree  of  west  longitude  (of 
the  same  meridian),  and  finally,  from  said 


1896.] 


The  Alaska  Boundary  Line. 


519 


] 


point  of  intersection,  the  said  meridian- 
line  of  the  141st  degree,  in  its  prolonga- 
tion as  far  as  the  Frozen  Ocean. 

"IV.  With  reference  to  the  line  of 
demarcation  laid  down  in  the  preceding 
article,  it  is  understood  :  — 

*'  1st.  That  the  island  called  Prince  of 
Wales  Island  «hall  belong  wholly  to  Rus- 
sia (now,  by  this  cession,  to  the  United 
States). 

"  2d.  That  whenever  the  summit  of 
the  mountains  which  extend  in  a  direc- 
tion parallel  to  the  coast  from  the  o6th 
degree  of  north  latitude  to  the  point  of 
intersection  of  the  141st  degree  of  west 
longitude  shall  prove  to  be  at  the  dis- 
tance of  more  than  ten  marine  leagues 
from  the  ocean,  the  limit  between  the 
British  possessions  and  the  line  of  coast 
which  is  to  belong  to  Russia,  as  above 
mentioned  (that  is  to  say,  the  limit  to 
the  possessions  ceded  by  this  convention), 
shall  be  formed  by  a  line  parallel  to  the 
winding  of  the  coast,  and  which  shall 
never  exceed  the  distance  of  ten  marine 
leagues  therefrom." 

Nearly  all  boundary-line  treaties  have 
been  found  more  or  less  faulty  in  con- 
struction when  subjected  to  rigorous  tests 
such  as  are  sure  to  oome  sooner  or  later. 
This  is  doubtless  to  be  attributed  in  a 
great  degree  to  the  fact  that  they  are 
usually  framed  by  politicians  rather  than 
by  geographers  ;  the  advice  of  the  latter 
being  often  ignored.  The  political  diplo- 
mat is  generally  possessed  by  a  single 
dominant  idea  in  entering  into  a  conven- 
tion, to  which  all  others  must  be  subordi- 
nate, and  to  the  realization  of  which  all 
other  features  of  the  treaty  must  lead. 

The  convention  of  1824  between  the 
United  States  and  Russia,  and  that  of 
1825  between  Russia  and  Great  Britain 
(in  wnich  are  to  be  found  the  boundary- 
line  articles  quoted  above),  were  the  re- 
sult of  a  determination  on  the  part  of  the 
two  English-speaking  nations  to  break 
down  the  Russian  Emperor's  ukase  of 
1821,  in  which  territory  extending  as  low 
as  51°  north  latitude  was  claimed  by  Rus- 


sia, as  well  as  complete  jurisdiction  over 
nearly  all  water  north  of  this  line,  thus 
threatening  the  iishing  and  whaling  in- 
terests and  the  carrying-trade  of  both 
nations.  The  limitation  of  Russian  pos- 
sessions to  that  part  of  the  coast  above 
54'  40'  north  latitude  and  the  grant- 
ing of  certain  maritime  privileges  for  a 
limited  time  were  the  principal  results 
sought  after  and  accomplished,  and  un- 
questionably little  thought  was  given  to 
the  definition  of  a  boundary  line  which 
traversed  a  region  esteemed  to  be  of  lit- 
tle value,  either  present  or  prospective. 
In  consequence  of  this  indifference  and 
the  apparent  absence  of  geographical  in- 
stinct in  framing  the  treaty,  we  have  an 
agreement  through  which  it  is  no  v  pro- 
posed to  "  drive  a  coach  and  six  "  in  the 
interests  of  the  ever  aggressive  and  per- 
sistently expanding  British  Empire. 

It  is  therefore  important  for  intelli- 
gent Americans  to  understand  the  weak- 
ness of  the  articles  of  agreement  upon 
which  our  Alaska  boundary  claims  are 
assumed  to  rest.  They  can  best  be  con- 
sidered in  the  order  of  definition  in  the 
treaty. 

In  the  first  paragraph  is  found  the  not 
uncommon  but  always  unfortunate  error 
of  "  double  definition,"  or  rather,  in  this 
pai'ticular  case,  of  attempting  to  fix  an 
astronomical  position  by  international 
treaty.  It  could  not  be  known  in  1825, 
and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  not  now 
known,  that  the  southernmost  point  of 
Prince  of  Wales  Island  is  on  the  paral- 
lel of  54°  40'  of  north  latitude,  for  it  is 
almost  absolutely  certain  not  to  be  on 
this  parallel.  No  harm  comes  from  this, 
however,  as  in  a  subsequent  article  (IV.) 
the  possibility  of  this  definition  resulting 
in  a  divided  jurisdiction  over  the  lower 
extremity  of  that  island  is  prevented  by 
the  provision  that  the  whole  island  shall 
belong  to  Russia  (now  to  the  United 
States).  The  incident  is  quite  worthy  of 
note,  however,  as  illustrating  the  claim 
that  the  dominant  idea  was  the  54°  40' 
line.     The  prominence  of  this  idea,  in- 


163810 


520 


The  Ahtskd  Boundary  Line. 


[April, 


SKETCH-MAP   OF   SOUTHEAST   ALASKA. 

Showing  Points  in  Controversy,  and  the  Boundary  Lines  as  drawn  on  Official  Maps  of  the  United  States  and  Canada. 

deed,  in  the  minds  of  the  several  powers  the  east  for  about  fifty  miles  in  order 
was  so  great  as  to  give  rise  to  the  second  to  reach  the  entrance  of  Portland  Chan- 
ambiguity  in  the  boundary-line  definition,  nel,  or  Portland  Canal,  as  it  is  often 
which  follows  immediately  upon  the  heels  called.  On  the  absence  of  anything  in 
of  the  first.  The  description  says,  "  Com-  the  treaty  in  reference  to  this  eastward 
mencing  from  the  southernmost  point "  line  has  been  founded  a  claim  that  the 
(Cape  Muzon),  etc.,  "  the  said  line  shall  use  of  the  name  "  Portland  Channel "  is 
ascend  to  the  north  along  the  channel  an  error,  an  oversight,  and  that  the  line 
called  Portland  Channel."  Now,  an  ex-  was  meant  to  be  drawn  by  turning  to  the 
amination  of  the  sketch-map  of  Alaska,  north  as  soon  as  possible,  which  would 
shown  above,  will  make  it  clear  that,  be  after  passing  Cape  Chacon,  the  east' 
beginning  with  the  point  of  departure  ernmost  of  the  two  capes  at  the  southern 
as  defined  above,  one  must  proceed  to  extremitv  of  Prince  of  Wales  Island,  and 


I 


"April, 


1890.] 


The  Alanl-a  Boumlarij  Line. 


521 


-60'' 


58" 


r° 


da. 

er 

n- 

;n 

in 

d 

e 

s 

e 

I 


"  asci'mliiij;  to  the  north  "  through  Clar- 
ence Strait  and  Beliin  Canal,  and  iinally 
intersecting  the  iiOth  jjarallel  of  north 
latitude  in  Burroughs  Bay.  The  effect 
of  this  would  he  to  throw  the  whole  of 
the  great  Uevilla-Gigedo  Island,  together 
with  a  large  territory  hetwaen  that  and 
Portland  Canal  (all  of  which  has  heen 
almost  universally  recognized  as  helong- 
ing  to  Alaska),  over  to  the  'British  side. 
Preposterous  as  is  this  claim,  it  has  for 
some  years  received  official  support  at 
the  hands  of  the  Canadian  authorities, 
who  have  so  drawn  the  line  on  several 
of  their  official  m.aps.  It  is  found  on  a 
general  map  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada 
puhlished  by  the  Interior  Department  in 
1887,  and  it  is  drawn  in  the  same  way 
upon  what  purports  to  he  a  copy  of  an 
official  Canadian  n>ap  of  1884  (accompa- 
nying Executive  Document  146,  Fiftieth 
Congress,  second  session),  although  an 
original,  now  before  me,  of  same  date 
and  title,  and  with  which  the  copy  is  al- 
most identical  in  other  respects,  exhibits 
the  line  as  following  the  Portland  Canal, 
in  accord  with  the  ti'aditional  claims  of 
the  UniCi-d  States.  In  recent  English  dis- 
patches it  has  been  announced  that  new 
facts  relating  to  the  treaty  have  been 
discovered  whifch  greatly  strengthen  the 
later  Canadian  interpretation  of  this  part 
of  the  line,  but  it  is  hai'dly  to  be  be- 
lieved that  English  diplomats  will  con- 
sider this  line  in  any  other  light  than  as 
affording  excellent  material  with  which 
to  "  trade  "  in  convention,  or  on  which  to 
''  yield  "  in  arbitration. 

On  entering  the  mouth  of  the  Port- 
land Channel,  which  is  struck  almost  in 
the  centre  by  the  54°  40'  line,  we  meet 
with  another  claim  of  comparatively  re- 
cent date.  Just  to  the  north  of  what  must 
be  admitted  to  be  the  real  entrance  to 
this  channel  are  two  considerable  islands, 
Wales  Island  and  Pearse  Island  North 
of  these  is  a  narrow,  dangerous  channel 
separating  them  from  the  mainland,  and 
joining  Portland  Canal  above  with  the 
open  sea.     It  is  claimed  that,  admitting 


Portland  Channel,  as  laid  down  on  the 
maps,  to  bo  the  real  channel  referred  to 
in  the  treaty,  this  comi)aratively  narrow 
I)assage  is  a  part  of  it,  and  the  boundary 
line  must  be  drawn  through  it  so  as  to 
jnit  Wales  Island  and  Pearse  Island  on 
the  Canadian  side.  This  claim  is  not 
recognized  on  the  official  Canadian  map 
referred  to  abeve,  dated  1884,  but  it  is 
upon  that  of  1887.  It  can  have  but  lit- 
tle value,  except  when  it  comes  to  the 
'' general  scramble  "  which  is  evidently 
being  prepared  for. 

The  Portland  Canal  jn'esents  another 
difficulty  in  the  fact  that  it  does  not  ac- 
tually reach  the  "o(ith  degree  of  north 
latitude,"  as  seems  to  be  implied  in  the 
language  of  the  treaty,  and  this  has  been 
used  as  an  argument  to  prove  that  Port- 
land Channel  was  not  really  the  channel 
through  which  it  was  originally  intended 
to  draw  the  boundary  line.  But  this  canal 
comes  to  within  a  very  short  distance  of 
the  .'jGth  parallel,  probably  falling  short 
of  it  by  not  more  than  three  or  four 
miles,  and  possibly  by  not  more  than  a 
fraction  of  a  mile.  The  Salmon  and 
Bear  rivers  debouch  into  this  canal  at 
its  head,  and  the  bed  of  either  may  re- 
present the  extension  of  the  inlet  to  the 
56th  parallel.  In  any  event,  it  is  a  mat- 
ter of  no  great  importance,  as  some  sort 
of  hiatus  must  necessarily  exist  in  a  line 
passing  from  the  level  of  the  sea  to  the 
summit  of  mountains. 

Altogether  the  most  serious  trouble  is 
to  be  anticipated  in  the  interpretation  of 
that  part  of  the  treaty,  which  defines  the 
line  as  it  is  to  be  dx-awn  from  the  head 
of  Portland  Canal  to  the  141st  meridian 
of  west  longitude  near  Mount  St.  Elias. 

In  Article  III.  the  language  used  is 
that  *'  from  this  last-mentioned  point " 
(where  Portland  Channel  strikes  the  56th 
degree  of  north  latitude)  "  ihe  line  of 
demarcation  shall  follow  the  summit  of 
the  mountains  situated  parallel  to  the 
coast  as  far  as  the  point  of  intersection 
of  the  141st  degree  of  west  longitude," 
etc.     But  as  there  was,  apparently,  even 


622 


The  Aldska  lioiindiiry  Line. 


[April, 


then  a  doubt  as  to  tlie  position  if  not 
the  existence  of  sucilj  a  range,  tlie  second 
paragraph  of  Article  IV.  was  inserted, 
defining  the  distance  of  the  line  from 
the  winding  of  the  coast,  in  case  tlie  as- 
sumed mountain  range  might  ))e  found 
to  run  further  from  the  shore  than  was 
then  supposed.  Although  most  interest- 
ed in  the  other  features  of  the  treaty,  it 
is  evident  that  British  diplomacy,  with 
its  accustomed  shrewdness,  was  looking 
after  secondary  as  well  as  jirimary  cpies- 
tions,  and  was  by  no  means  disposed  to 
trust  to  the  possible  meanderings  of  any 
little -known  range  of  mountains,  even 
though  drawn  upon  the  ma}>  by  its  own 
explorers.  It  was  provided,  therefore, 
that  while  the  *'  summit  of  the  mountains 
parallel  to  the  coast  "  should  furnish  the 
boundary  line  whenever  such  line  would 
be  ten  marine  leagues,  or  less,  from  the 
coast,  if  it  should  appear  in  the  future 
that  said  mountains  carried  their  sum- 
mits to  a  greater  distance  inland,  then 
the  line  was  to  be  drawn  "  parallel  to  the 
winding  of  the  coast,"  and  so  as  never 
to  ''  exceed  the  distance  of  ten  marine 
leagues  therefrom."  It  is  important  to 
note  that  this  article  may  be  regarded  as 
containing  something  stronger  than  a 
quasi-admission  on  the  pai-t  of  Great 
Britain  that  the  stri{)  of  territory  con- 
ceded to  belong  to  Russia  should  be  in 
width  ten  marine  leagues  from  the  coast 
line  :  it  also  implies  that  this  is  the  maxi- 
mum width  to  which  she  will  consent, 
and  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  treaty 
to  prevent  her  making  it  one  league  or 
half  a  league,  if,  in  the  future,  she  is  able 
to  do  so  and  the  mountains  j)iit'Mel  to 
the  coast  do  not  stand  in  the  way. 

When  this  treaty  was  made,  and  in- 
deed until  a  comparatively  recent  date, 
the  charts  of  the  region  prepared  under 
the  direction  of  Vancouver  were  the  most 
reliable  at  hand.  One  of  them  (it  is  like- 
ly to  have  been  the  French  edition)  was 
doubtless  before  the  authors  of  the  ar- 
ticles defining  the  boundary  line.  All 
show^  a  welWefined  range  of  mountains, 


running  nearly  parallel  to  the  coast  line, 
and  renjoved  from  it  by  a  varying  dis- 
tance, sometimes  as  great  as  forty  miles 
or  more.  It  is  now  known,  however,  and 
has  been  known  for  several  years,  that  the 
very  regular  and  neatly  drawn  mountain 
ranges  which  Vancouver's  map  exhibits 
owe  their  origin  to  the  imagination  of  his 
draughtsman  more  than  to  anything  else ; 
that  is,  as  far  as  their  form  goes.  In- 
deed, it  is  probably  just  to  say  that  they 
were  intended  only  as  conventional  re- 
presentations of  the  fact  that  mountains 
were  seen  in  almost  every  direction,  and 
especially  in  looking  from  the  coast  to- 
ward the  interior.  Within  the  past  few 
years  many  topographical  maps  have 
been  executed,  and  many  photographs 
have  been  made  of  these  mountains  as 
viewed  from  the  sunnnits  of  some  of 
those  which  are  accessible.  Very  ex- 
cellent viqjvs  have  been  obtained  from 
elevations  of  four  thousand  and  five  thou- 
sand feet,  looking  towards  the  interior 
and  extending  far  beyond  any  claim  of 
the  United  States.  These  show  a  vast 
"  sea  cf  mountains  "  in  every  direction, 
generally  increasing  in  elevation  as  the 
distance  from  the  coast  increases.  Seen 
from  a  distance  or  from  the  deck  of  a 
ship  at  sea,  they  might  easily  create  the 
impression  of  a  range  or  ranges  "  par- 
allel to  the  winding  of  the  coast."  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  there  is  nothing  of  the 
kind,  but  only  the  most  confused  and  ir- 
regular scattering  of  mountains  over  the 
whole  territory,  at  least  until  the  Fair- 
weather  range,  south  of  Mount  St.  Elias, 
is  reached.  Of  course  it  is  quite  possi- 
ble to  draw  a  series  of  lines  from  moun- 
tain summit  to  mountain  summit,  which 
would  form  a  line  parallel  to  the  coast, 
or  any  other  assumed  line,  but  no  one 
can  deny  that  the  language  of  the  treaty 
implies  a  range  of  summits  extending  "  in 
a  direction  parallel  to  the  coast."  As 
the  mountains  which  actually  exist  cover 
the  territory  down  to  the  water's  edge, 
the  logical  application  of  the  mountain- 
summit  definition,  if  it  is  to  be  applied 


)ril, 


181)0.] 


The  AhtHhn  Boundary  Line. 


523 


at  all,  is  to  draw  tlio  line  from  peak  to 
peak  along  the  scacoast,  and  this  our 
friends  on  tlie  other  side  have  not  hesi- 
tated to*do.  It  is  so  drawn  on  the  ofh- 
cial  Canadian  map  dated  1887,  and  also 
by  Dr.  G.  M.  Dawson,  director  of  the 
Dominion  Geological  Survey,  on  his  map 
submitted  to  siiow  proposed  conventional 
boundary  lines.  Naturally,  tliis  line,  in 
common  with  all  recently  drawn  maps 
of  the  Canadian  government,  practically 
leaves  little  to  us  except  the  group  of 
Islands  lying  off  the  mainland.  While 
nominally  allowing  us  a  narrow  strip, 
which  is  perhaps  not  quite  all  covered 
by  high  tides,  it  makes  several  short  cuts 
which  serve  to  break  the  continuity  of 
our  coast  line,  and  to  give  considerable 
seacoast  to  British  Columbia. 

Against  the  mountain-summit  theory, 
the  contention  of  the  United  States  is, 
or  should  be,  that  as  it  is  unquestionably 
proved  that  no  such  range  of  mountains 
exists  as  was  shown  on  the  charts  of  Van- 
couver, and  as  the  high  contracting  par- 
ties evidently  had  in  mind  when  they 
agi-eed  to  the  treaty,  it  becomes  neces- 
sary to  fall  back  upon  the  alternative  de- 
finition, which  places  the  line  "  parallel  to 
the  winding  of  the  coast,"  and  not  more 
than  ten  marine  leagues  distant  there- 
from. It  may  be  claimed  that  this  was  to 
have  application  only  in  localities  where 
the  range  of  "  mountains  parallel  to  the 
coast  "  was  more  than  ten  marine  leagues 
from  the  coast,  and  that  it  vanishes  when 
said  range  disappears.  In  reply  it  may 
be  said  that  there  are  indications  strong- 
ly pointing  to  the  actual  existence  of 
such  a  range  far  beyond  the  boundary 
limit  towards  the  interior  ;  but  even  if  it 
be  finally  known  that  no  such  range  ex- 
ists, either  more  or  less  than  ten  marine 
leagues  from  the  sea,  the  intent  of  the 
agreement  can  be  distinctly  proved ;  and 
in  the  impossibility  of  executing  one  of 
its  provisions,  an  alternative,  specially 
provided  for  the  failure  of  that  jne,  must 
be  accepted. 

Bat  as  soon  as  we  suggest  that  both  the 


spirit  and  the  letter  of  the  treaty  would 
be  satisfied  by  drawing  the  line  ten  ma- 
rine leagues  from  the  coast,  we  are  met 
with  some  astounding  arguments  an  to 
what  is  meant  by  the  coast.  A  well- 
known  English  authority  has  contended, 
in  effect,  that  the  coast  line  from  which 
this  distance  should  be  measured  should 
be  drawn  tangent  to,  and  so  as  to  include, 
the  islands  lying  along  the  coast.  The 
effect  of  this  wouhl  be  practically  to  ex- 
clude us  from  the  mainland,  and  to  throw 
valuable  parts  of  the  islands  theniselves 
over  to  the  Canadian  side.  In  the  face 
of  the  plain  statement  that  the  line  is  to 
be  drawn  "  parallel  to  the  winding  [*•*'- 
nuosltes']  of  the  coast,"  it  is  not  believed 
that  this  point  can  be  seriously  urged. 

Should  it  be  found  possible  to  project 
a  line  satisfactory  to  both  parties,  from 
Dixon's  Entrance,  at  some  point  of  which 
it  must  begin,  to  the  region  of  the  Mount 
St.  Elias  Alps,  there  will  be  no  difficulty 
in  agreeing  ujjon  the  remainder  of  the 
boundary.  From  the  point  where  it 
strikes  the  14l8t  meridian  west  longitude 
it  is  to  be  extended  along  that  meridian 
'•  as  far  as  the  Frozen  Ocean."  Since  it 
is  an  astronomical  line,  its  position  can  be 
ascertained  as  accurately  as  circumstances 
require. 

In  order  to  remove  a  not  uncommon 
but  erroneous  impression  that  the  Alaska 
boimdary  line  is  now,  and  has  been  for 
some  time,  in  a  state  of  adjudication,  it 
may  be  well  to  say  that  thus  far  nothing 
has  been  done  except  to  execute  such 
surveys  as  have  been  thought  desirable 
and  necessary  for  the  construction  of 
maps,  by  which  the  whole  subject  could 
be  properly  presented  to  a  joint  boun- 
dary -  line  commission  whenever  such 
should  be  appointed,  and  on  which  the 
location  of  the  line  could  be  definitively 
laid  down  if  a  mutual  agreement  should 
be  reached.  Such  a  survey  was  first 
brought  to  the  attention  of  Congress  in 
a  message  of  President  Grant  in  1872. 
It  was  not  until  1889,  however,  that  the 
work  was  begun  by  the  United  States 


624 


Thv   Ahtshd   lif  itidary  Line, 


[April, 


Coast  and  Goodotic  Survey,  wliicli  sent 
two  parties  to  the  valley'  of  the  Yiiiton,  in 
the  vast  interior  of  the  territory*  with 
instruetions  to  establish  camps,  one  on 
that  river,  and  tlie  other  on  its  branch 
the  l\n-eu))inc,  both  to  be  as  near  the 
141st  meridian  as  possiltle.  Tiiese  par- 
ties were  to  carry  on  a  series  of  astro- 
nomical observations  for  tlio  purpose  of 
determining  tlie  location  of  the  meridian, 
to  execute  such  trianifulalion  and  topo- 
gra])liical  surveys  as  were  necessary  for 
its  identification,  and  to  establish  perma- 
nent moninnents  as  nearly  as  might  be 
upon  the  meridian  line. 

They  remained  at  their  posts,  under 
stress  of  weather  and  other  unfavorable 
conditions,  for  two  years,  during  which 
their  work  was  done  in  a  manner  quite 
sufficient  for  any  demands  ever  likely  to 
be  made  upon  it.  The  two  most  imj)or- 
tant  points  on  the  boundary,  where  it  in- 
tersects the  two  great  rivers  named  above, 
were  thus  determined,  and  a  y.;ar  or  two 
later  the  position  of  the  boundary  merid- 
ian in  relation  to  the  summit  of  Mount 
St.  Elias  was  established.  Jt  is  diflieult 
to  see  what  more  will  be  required  for  a 
long  time  to  come,  as  far  as  relates  to 
this  ])art  of  the  boundary  line.  In  south- 
east Alaska,  where  all  the  uncertainties 
as  to  definition  of  the  boundary  line  exist, 
peculiar  and  in  a  certain  sense  insuper- 
able obstacles  are  met  with  in  the  actual 
survey  or  "  running  "  of  a  line  in  the  or- 
dinary sense.  In  nearly  all  of  the  pro- 
posed routes  most  of  the  line  passes 
through  a  region  practically  inaccessible, 
or  at  least  not  accessible  without  the  ex- 
penditure of  enormous  sums  of  money 
and  many  years  of  time,  wholly  dispro- 
portionate to  the  end  to  be  gained.  To 
attempt  to  make  anything  like  a  detailed 
topographical  survey  of  the  wide  region 
covered  by  the  several  claims,  of  suffi- 
cient accuracy  to  satisfy  the  conditions, 
and  to  "  run  "  a  line  wherever  it  slio\dd 
finally  be  located,  would  involve  labor 
and  expense  impossible  to  estimate  in 
advance,  but  sure  to  be  extraordinarily 


great.  In  view  of  these  facts,  it  was 
determined  to  nuiko  such  a  survey  as 
would  enable  a  boundary-line  connnission 
to  fix  upon  any  one  of  several  "  conven- 
tional "  lines  whidi  had  been  suggested 
already  as  satisfactory  substitutes  for 
that  of  the  treaty,  now  generally  admit- 
ted to  be  impossible  of  lealization.  In 
July,  l<S91i,  an  agreement  was  entered 
into  between  the  United  States  and  Great 
liritain  for  the  execution  of  a  joint  or 
coincident  survey  of  this  region,  for  boun- 
dary -  line  purposes.  It  was  agreed  by 
the  conniiissioners  appointed  to  make 
this  survey  to  carry  out,  in  effect,  the 
plan  mentioned  above.  Astronomical 
stations  were  to  be  established  at  the 
mouths  of  the  principal  rivers  which  flow 
across  the  boundary  line,  namely,  at  the 
head  of  Burroughs  Bay,  the  mouths  of 
the  Stikine  and  the  Taku,  and  the  head 
of  Lynn  Canal.  A  series  of  triangles 
wero  to  be  run  from  these  up  the  river 
valleys,  until  a  point  beyond  the  probable 
or  possible  location  of  the  boundary  was 
reached.  Topographical  sketches  were 
to  be  made  and  a  good  deal  of  photo- 
graphic topograjjhy  was  to  be  done,  espe- 
cially by  the  Canadian  parties.  This 
plan,  which  was  successfully  carried  out, 
received  the  ajtju'oval  of  the  Department 
of  State,  and  the  representatives  of  the 
two  governments  cooperated  in  its  exe- 
cution. It  is  believed  to  have  furnished 
all  information,  besides  what  had  been 
previously  accumulated,  necessary  to  a 
full  discussion  and  a  complete  settlement 
of  the  controversy.  One  of  the  impor- 
tant results  of  this  work  has  been  the  ac- 
cumulation of  evidence,  if  indeed  any 
were  netded,  of  the  impossibility  of  the 
"  mountain-summit  "  line,  and  the  conse- 
quent necessity  of  falling  back  upon  a 
line  at  a  measured  distance  from  the 
coast.  That  this  distance,  in  accordance 
with  the  spirit  and  intent  of  the  treaty 
of  1825,  should  be  practically  ten  marine 
leagues  is  apparent  from  the  treaty  itself 
and  from  contemporaneous  history.  It 
was  evidently  meant  to  convey,  or  rather 


VI 


1890.] 


The  Alaska  Boumtary  Line. 


Om'l 


to   (roiifiriu,  to  Utis.s!a  a  "strip  of   tlui     the  lanjjuugo  of  tlio  treaty  and  from  con- 
coa:4t,"   coinplotu    anil    unl)rokt'n,    from      tiMiiporaneous  luHtory,  that  the  titrip  of 


the  parallel  of  54  40'  north  latitude  to 
^Monnt  St.  Ellas.  The  word  llslire  used 
in  the  treaty  to  describe  this  strip,  and 
whicii  becomes  "  lino  "  in  the  English 
version,  means  much  more  than  that,  be- 
ing originally  etiuivalent  to  "  border," 
"  selvage,"  "  fringe,"  or  "  list  "  of  cloth. 


coast  was  intended  to  be  I'nutlniioiis  from 
the  parallel  of  54"  40'  north  latitude. 
The  right  of  complete  jurisdiction  over 
this  coast,  exercised  so  long  by  Russia 
without  jjrotest  from  Great  Britain,  be- 
came ours  by  purciiase  in  1S(»7.  Since 
that  date  the  development  of  the  north- 


always  standing  for  something  of  very  west  has  shown  the  great  value  of  this 

definite  width  and  continuity.     Coiitenj-  lisiere.     Its  existence  has  become  espe- 

porary  writers  might  be  (pioted,  showing  cially  disagreeable  to  CJreat  Britain,  be- 

a   common    belief    aniong    Englishmen  cause  through  its  waterways    and  over 

themselves  that  the  treaty  accorded   to  its  passes  much  of  the  emigration  and 

Russia   a  very  definite  and  (!ontiiuious  material  supjdits   for  her  northwestern 


strip  of  the  mainland,  which,  by  cutting 
off  direct  access  to  the  coast,  "  rendered 
the  great  interior  of  comparatively  little 
value." 

In  conclusion,  the  situation  may  be 
summed  up  as  follows  :  — 

Our  purchase  of  Alaska  from  Russia 
in  1807  included  a  strip  of  the  c(vt  . 
(lisiere  de  rote)  extending  from  north 
latitude  .54°  40'  to  the  region  of  Mount 
St.  Elias.  This  strip  was  thought  to  be 
separated  from  the  British  possessions 
by  a  range  of  mountains  (then  bupposed 
to  exist)  parallel  to  the  coast,  or,  in  the 
case  of   these  mountains  being  too  re- 


territory  nnist  go.  The  possession  by 
us  of  the  entire  coast  of  North  America 
north  of  54^  40'  to  the  Arctic  Ocean  is 
not  in  itself  in  harmony  with  her  desire 
or  her  j)olicy.  The  Alaska  boundary- 
liii';  dispute  offers  an  opi)ortunity  to 
break  the  continuity  of  our  territorial 
jurisdiction,  and  by  securing  certain  por- 
ti  WIS  of  the  coast  to  herself  greatly  to 
d''ninish  the  value  of  the  remaining  de- 
tached fragments  to  us.  The  wisdom  of 
this  fr(mi  the  Downing  Street  standpoint 
cannot  be  ({uestioned.  Those  of  us  who 
desire  to  as.sist  in  its  accomplishment 
have  only  to  urge  the  importance  of  sub- 


mote,  by  a  line  parallel  to  the  windings      mitting  every  controversy  of  this  kind, 


{sinuosith)  of  the  coast,  and  nowhere 
greater  than  ten  marine  leagues  from  the 
same.  As  the  advantage  of  an  alterna- 
tive line  could  hardly  have  been  intend- 
ed to  accrue  to  one  only  of  the  contract- 
ing parties,  and  as  Great  Britain  would 


no  matter  whether  we  are  right  or  wrong, 
to  the  court  of  arbitration.  Arbitration 
is  compromise,  esjjecially  when  two  great 
and  nearly  equally  strong  nations  are  en- 
gaged in  it.  No  matter  how  much  or 
how  little  a  nation  carries  to  an  arbitra- 


benefit  by  every  nearer  approach  of  the      tion.  it  is  tolerably  certain  to  bring  some- 


alleged  mountain  range  than  ten  marine 
leagues,  it  must  be  inferred  that  the  spirit 
and  intent  of  the  treaty  was  to  give  Rus- 
sia the  full  ten  leagues  wherever  a  range 
of  mountains  nearer  to  the  coast  than  that 
did  not  exist.  For  more  than  fifty  years 
there  was,  as  far  as  is  known,  no  claim 
on  the  part  of  Great  Britain  to  any  oth- 
er than  this  simple  interpretation  of  the 
treaty,  and  up  to  a  very  recent  d"te  all 


thing  away.  Once  before  a  board  of 
arbitration,  the  English  government  has 
only  to  set  up  and  vigorousl}  urge  all  of 
the  claims  referred  to  above,  and  more 
that  can  easily  be  invented,  and  it  is  all 
but  absolutely  certain  that,  although  by 
both  tradition  and  equity  we  should  de- 
cline to  yield  a  foot  of  what  we  pur- 
chased in  good  faith  from  Russia,  and 
which  has  become  doubly  valuable  to  ua 


maps  were  drawn  practically  in  accord     by  settlement  and  exploration,  our  lisiere 
with  it.   Above  all,  it  is  clear,  both  from     will  be  promptly  broken  into  fragments, 


526 


Latter-Day   Cranford. 


[April, 


and,  with  much  show  of  impartiality, 
divided  between  the  two  high  contracting 
parties. 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  our  share  in  re- 
cent important  events  has  tended  to  lead 
us  toward  this  end  rather  than  away  from 
it.  We  have  thrust  ourselves  into  a  con- 
troversy over  a  boundary  line  on  another 
continent,  in  which  we  can  have  no  inter- 
est, except  perhaps  that  which  grows  out 
of  a  very  foggy  and  uncertain  sentiment. 
We  have  assumed  that  a  European  power 
is  about  to  "  extend  its  system  "  to  a 
port  of  the  western  continent,  or  that 
England  is  on  the  point  of  "  oppress- 
ing "  the  people  of  a  South  American 
republic,  or  of  "  controlling  the  desti- 
ny "  of  their  government.  Against  this 
we  have  made  an  active  and  aggressive 
protest,  and  have  clearly  intimated  that 
if  Great  Britain  does  not  submit  this 
boundary  question  to  arbitration  we  shall 
make  trouble.  In  so  doing  we  have 
once  more  put  ourselves  exactly  where 
far-sighted  English  statesmanship  would 
have  us.  Under  ordinary  circumstances 
our  attitude  on  this  question  would  be 
considered  as  almost  an  offense,  and  the 
channels  of  diplomatic   correspondence 


would  not  be  as  clear  and  uninterrupted 
as  they  now  are. 

The  truth  is  that  Great  Britain  is 
meeting  our  wishes  in  this  matter  with 
almost  indecent  haste,  because  the  arbi- 
tration of  the  Alaska  boundary  line,  by 
which  she  hopes  and  expects  to  acquire 
an  open  seacoast  for  her  great  northwest 
territories,  and  to  weaken  us  by  breaking 
our  exclusive  jurisdiction  north  of  54° 
40',  is  enormously  more  important  to 
her  than  anything  she  is  likely  to  gain  or 
lose  in  South  America.  Having  driven 
her  to  accept  arbitration  in  this  case,  it 
will  be  impossible  for  us  to  refuse  it  in 
Alaska,  and  we  shall  find  ourselves  again 
badly  worsted  by  tlie  diplomatic  skill  of 
a  people  who,  as  individuals,  have  de- 
veloped intellectual  activity,  manliness, 
courage,  unselfish  devotion  to  duty,  and 
general  nobility  of  character,  elsewhere 
unequaled  in  the  world's  history,  but 
whose  diplomatic  policy  as  a  nation  is 
and  long  has  been  characterized  by  ag- 
gressiveness, greed,  absolute  indifference 
to  the  rights  of  others,  and  a  splendid 
facility  in  ignoring  every  principle  of  jus- 
tice or  international  law  whenever  com- 
mercial interests  are  at  stake. 

T.  C.  Mendenhall. 


LATTER-DAY  CRANFORD. 


It  is  the  eccentric  dower  of  some  to 
gi'ow  quite  as  hot-headed  and  tremulous 
over  a  prospective  needle  in  a  haymow 
as  ever  Midas  could  have  been  on  re- 
ceiving his  gift.  To  such,  Knutsford,  in 
Cheshire,  offers  a  perfect  hunting-ground 
for  that  sort  of  plunder  so  humorous- 
ly resembling  Gratiano's  reasons :  "  You 
shall  seek  all  day  ere  you  find  them ; 
and  when  you  have  them,  they  are  not 
worth  the  search."  No  more  satisfying 
occupation  can  be  invented  in  this  an- 
cient world  than  the  pursuit  of  what  does 
not  absolutely  exist,  if  only  the  hunter 


be  just  credulous  enough ;  bold  in  belief, 
yet  "  not  too  bold."  He  must  cling  to 
his  guesswork  with  a  dauntless  zeal ;  at 
tbe  same  time,  he  shall,  for  his  own  ease, 
recognize  the  probable  futility  of  such 
d'^ggedness.  For  to  reconstruct  a  habi- 
tation on  the  base  of  some  foregone  ro- 
mance is  to  strike  a  balance  between  spe- 
cial disappointment  and  a  vague  general 
joy. 

The  present  Knutsford,  in  toto,  is 
emphatically  not  the  Cranford  of  Mrs. 
Gaskell's  homely  chronicle,  but  it  glit- 
ters with  links  of  similitude ;  moreover, 


